I think it's silly to comment why you vote in one way or
another. It's even more silly to comment only your negative
votes, but not your positive votes, why one, but not the other?
But if every one is going to comment their votes, soon more than
half the posts here are about explaining their votes. But since
you can vote on those votes, eventually, all that's being talked
about is how one voted. Perl content will be hard to spot.

However, when you disagree with someone, do you just tell them you differ and leave it at that?

When someone is presenting a point or attempting to persuade a group of people, I feel that if my opinion differs strongly from theirs, my opinion should be made aware of as a differing point of view. Not because I'm egotistical, but because in a open forum like this one, everyone that visits has an opinion and is entitled to let that be known to others.

Usually, if I approve of the node (++, not moderation) I leave a comment to the author or let them know somehow. If I disagree or dislike what someone has posted, I either talk to them or downvote.

The voting is just an aside; the exchange of information between monks is what's important and what should be the focus of time spent here.

However, when you disagree with someone, do you just tell them you differ and leave it at that?

It depends, but that doesn't have much to do with this discussion.
I at least generally don't downvote a note because I disagree with
someone. Typical downvote reasons (for me) are:

It's a non-Perl question - many web questions are non-Perl
questions, even if a program written in Perl is involved.

The question is too poorly phrased. It requires too much
guessing what the problem is. This includes too much bad grammar,
too many typos, and bad specification of the problem(s).

The post is just wrong. (Probably the majority of my down
votes fall in this category). This sometimes causes me to
downvote every single post in a thread.

People not reading what they are replying to careful enough,
and coming up with code that doesn't meet the requirements given.

People asking FAQs or trivial things that could have been found
easily in the manual.

But most of the time, I don't bother voting. I often have at the end
of the day still the same amount of votes left I had at the beginning.

I also know the arguments why others don't downvote for the reasons I do.
You don't have to repeat them - but posts that fall in one or more
of the categories mentioned above decrease the value I get from perlmonks.
Hence, they are getting my downvotes. And I'm not advocating anyone else
should use the same voting guidelines.

I agree,
commenting on why you vote one way or another is extremely silly/pointless.

If I see home-rolled CGI stuff, i'll -- a node, and there'll usually be someone who says "Hey, don't home-roll broken CGI stuff, use CGI instead.".
If no one happens to have said it yet, i'll say it, but discussion of my downvote will usually never come to mention.

On the other hand, let's not get rid of the entire XP thingy. Let's not (let the whores run rampant if they will, you don't have to be one).

Also, there will be plenty downvotes , the key thing to learn is not to whine about it (a whore can't make an XP if she spends half an hour whining about how she got gipped on her last job).

I am an XP whore. Do your worst.

____________________________________________________** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.

Awwww, come one! Some of us need whatever validation we can get. It's like that scene twords the end of The Wizard of Oz:

Back where I come from we have men who are called heroes. Once a year they take their fortitude out of mothballs and parade it down the main street of the city. And they have no more
courage than you have. But - they have one thing that you haven't got! A medal!! Therefore, for meritorious conduct,
extraordinary valor, conspicuous bravery against wicked witches, I award you the Triple Cross. You are now a
member of the Legion of Courage!

I figure XP is like that. Sure, it's all in our heads, but still, it's fun to parade up and down Main Street with once a year or so.

Personally I like the XP because I can use it to gauge whether my comments are worthwhile, or absolute rubbish. Some might argue that in the end what other people think about someone's comments don't really matter but as someone who's trying to improve their Perl abilities it's a big help.

However, more useful are the comments that go along with the voting - I did consider how much time we'd end up commenting on our voting choices if it was made mandatory (which I hope it never is). Personally if I think a node has something worthwhile but someone else has pointed it out, i'll just ++ it - if no-one's commented I might just jot down a couple of words. If I --'d someone then I (hopefully) would apply the same rules.

But if every one is going to comment their votes, soon more than half the posts here are about explaining their votes. But since you can vote on those votes, eventually, all that's being talked about is how one voted. Perl content will be hard to spot.

That's one application for the /msg facility in the Chatterbox. You can give a private message to the author, congratulating them on a good node, or LARTing them without embarrassing them in public. However, if there is a correction to code or factual inaccuracy, it is a much better idea to post a reply, so that everyone can get the benefit.

I've never used the chatterbox, and I never will. Not as long
as it has a tiny, tiny, tiny textfield to input your stuff in, and
an itty-bitty column cramped in the right column for reading.
The textfield to put your normal posts in is already small enough
(djees, even in the 70's we had 80x24 ttys) to get claustrophobia.
If I want to chat, I'd use IRC. The simplest of clients has
a better interface than the chatterbox.

How about some user defined CSS for the writeup edit box, the Java Chatterbox for chatting, and the Message Inbox for (at least replying to) /msg's? Even with ye olden days Unix tools, the idea was that users should be able to choose things to their liking, and the monastery is the most accomodating website I've run across with regards to letting you set things up the way you like them best.

I think it's silly to comment why you vote in one way or another. It's even more silly to comment only your negative votes, but not your positive votes, why one, but not the other?

I disagree.

What really is the point of Perlmonks? I think it's education and community. I don't generally comment on an upvote when I have nothing to add as it's truly pointless to just say "I agree, you're definitely right there." Usually, not always, but usually, when I down vote, I have a reason that might lend to the education of others, or myself when my reason is given and refuted. That's not pointless. When I upvote and I have something to add, I'll typically comment, also.

I will down vote a silly "Is too, is not, is too" argument, or some childish clearly off-topic, offensive or dangerous material without comment. Especially in the case that all that needs to be said has already been said, such as in the case of malicious scripts that have already been clearly identified as such.

Why don't we just get rid of this entire XP thingy?

I think XP adds to the atmosphere here. I encourage everyone to behold the wonder that is the highest upvoted node of all time.

Generally, it's more interesting to surf through the Daily, Weekly and All-Time Best nodes than to surf randomly, especially when you are short of time.

If you don't like XP, don't vote. If you don't want to see XP, login anonymously. You can still sign your nodes with a signature indicating it's abigail. Besides the frequent debates about XP, what's the downside of having it?

I will down vote a silly "Is too, is not, is too" argument, or some childish clearly off-topic, offensive or dangerous material without comment.
Especially in the case that all that needs to be said has already been said, such as in the case of malicious scripts that have already been clearly identified as such.

Maybe I wasn't as clear as I could have been, but the implication is that if malicious code has not already been identified as such, then more needs to be said and I'll say it.

Because it offers value through moderation and feedback. You seem very good with perl. I, on the other hand, haven't much experience (as opposed to XP) but am trying to join in and maybe offer what little I can. How am I going to know if their post is not worthwhile? Through votes. How am I going to know why I was wrong? Through replies.

Besides that I agree with you. In this post I am not saying that everyone needs offer feedback. I agree that to many of these explanations will lead to clutter. The other worry is that it may erode the anonymity enshrouds the voting process.

In spite of everything, I think everyone (esp myself) should remember involvement in this site is voluntary.

When putting a smiley right before a closing parenthesis, do you:

Use two parentheses: (Like this: :) )
Use one parenthesis: (Like this: :)
Reverse direction of the smiley: (Like this: (: )
Use angle/square brackets instead of parentheses
Use C-style commenting to set the smiley off from the closing parenthesis
Make the smiley a dunce: (:>
I disapprove of emoticons
Other